Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Anyone using a Hassy CF-39 or CFH-39  (Read 4554 times)
mkravit
Guest
« on: October 08, 2006, 09:46:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Just wondering if there are any user reports on the Hasselblad CF-39 and CFH-39 backs? Seems like most of the repots here are Leaf and Phase based.
Logged
andrewparker
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 17


« Reply #1 on: October 09, 2006, 09:37:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Just wondering if there are any user reports on the Hasselblad CF-39 and CFH-39 backs? Seems like most of the repots here are Leaf and Phase based.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79544\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Michael,

The silence tells a story. There seems to be a baffling lack of Imacon users on this forum. Are they too happy, or too despairing to contribute?

It would be very interesting to hear how the Imacon technology backs handle the wide angle, non-retrofocus lens problem.......

I don't own a back at the moment but am hopelessly drawn towards the new Wunderblad with its option to use fast well corrected wide angles in an integrated platform (if it works).

Since the internet is mostly rumour built on rumour I will say I am also looking to the forthcoming integrated Phase/Mamiya, with its own 28mm lens option.

Then I can shoot wide angle at speed and grapple with the lens cast/centrefold hassle only when a megawide is required, on one of the rigid  mini view cameras

Andrew Parker
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #2 on: October 09, 2006, 09:41:19 AM »
ReplyReply

I have long wanted to test an H39 back but Hasselblad doesn't respond to my requests. Given the events of the past couple of weeks I now doubt that they ever will (though I would welcome one at any time).

It seems that the members of this forum are mostly Leaf and Phase users, with a sprinkling of old Kodak DCS Pro Back and Mamiya ZD owners as well.

Michael
Logged
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 09, 2006, 11:43:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Are they too happy, or too despairing to contribute?

I doubt they are too despairing.  Perhaps,they're just too busy  :>))

There is a group at Yahoo Groups called Flexframe that is dedicated to Imacon/Hasselblad
back users and is a very tightly run,informative list without a lot of the typical,personal
BS that infiltrates most forums or heated discussions.
Generally,it is an owners only group but a few of us non-owning infidels have managed to
slip through the cracks.

I don't recall if their archives are publicly viewable but ,at any rate,you can contact the
list owner via Yahoo channels when inquiring about Flexframe and possibly get access.

I think it would be fair to characterize Imacon/Hasselblad back users no differently that
Leaf or Phase owners. The majority are very satisfied with, and loyal to, their chosen brand.
As seen here with other brands,there are some Imacon users who have run into issues
that have left them upset (with cause) but,by and large,they are a very satisfied group.

Mark

FWIW, I was able to test a CF39 on an H2 a few weeks back for a few days and was very
satisfied with the results. Files were as clean (although I didn't go past 100 iso) as I could
have wanted without any indication of sensor related color issues.
As it wasn't imperative to my needs,I didn't test the back in a people situation (which would
be of benefit to Edmund) or in an architectural situation (which would be of interest to Michael K)

I am looking for something to replace film (6x9 and 4x5) for use in print resale in a gallery
business.  The CF39 files,initially,seem to meet my expectations but additional testing (which
is booked for this coming weekend) is needed to determine how the back will handle the
type of tilt movement I use frequently to achieve extreme near/far focus corrections with 4x5.

I'll be using the back with my Hasselblad ArcBody and,while the lenses for that system are
not optimized for hi-res digital capture they will do fine (and performed very well on
a P45,BTW) to guage the overall performance of the back.

If it's of interest to you,Michael K, I'll do a few tests where I shift the lens in a fashion that
would be more of interest to someone shooting architectural subject matter.
Ther lenses,of course, aren't the current digital lineup and might not be prone to introduce
some of the lens/sensor aberrations that have been discussed,of late,but should give an
indication of the backs limitations,or strengths.
Logged
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 09, 2006, 11:51:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It seems that the members of this forum are mostly Leaf and Phase users, with a sprinkling of old Kodak DCS Pro Back and Mamiya ZD owners as well.


...and a few Sinar users
« Last Edit: October 09, 2006, 11:53:32 AM by foto-z » Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4207



« Reply #5 on: October 09, 2006, 12:23:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...and a few Sinar users
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79687\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I put that option in the poll ...

Edmund
Logged
mkravit
Guest
« Reply #6 on: October 09, 2006, 06:48:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Today I spoke with another photographer who shoots a lot of underwater and outdoor work. He tested the CFH and then opted to purchase one. He told me the color issues that plagued Imacon in the past have been fixed. He also said the color is as good if not better then any of the other backs he tested including Phase and Leaf. He saw no evidence of color fringing, or olor cast. He said the ISO 400 looked great.

He is doing post work this week after shooting his back all last week. He will be getting back to me later this week with his opinions.

More to follow.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2006, 06:49:37 PM by mkravit » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 10, 2006, 01:12:11 AM »
ReplyReply

I think you need to look at 'history' to see why there are few users

The P25 was the first non tethered back on the market without a stupid square crop it opened the digiback floodgates (followed by Leaf and sinar)

People have tended to stick to them or folow a subsidised upgrade path

The quality of the product probably should not be judged by quantity used

SMM
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
khwanaon
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 70


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 10, 2006, 04:34:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I think you need to look at 'history' to see why there are few users

The P25 was the first non tethered back on the market without a stupid square crop it opened the digiback floodgates (followed by Leaf and sinar)

People have tended to stick to them or folow a subsidised upgrade path

The quality of the product probably should not be judged by quantity used

SMM
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79758\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

agree, quality shouldn't by quantity.
another (very happy) Sinarback user
 
Logged
Tomas Johanson
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 10, 2006, 07:45:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If it's of interest to you,Michael K, I'll do a few tests where I shift the lens in a fashion that
would be more of interest to someone shooting architectural subject matter.
Ther lenses,of course, aren't the current digital lineup and might not be prone to introduce
some of the lens/sensor aberrations that have been discussed,of late,but should give an
indication of the backs limitations,or strengths.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=79685\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Im very interested if you can do a test with shifted lens like this.  

/Tomas
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad